Literature DB >> 21126358

The Brustkrebs-Studien.de website for breast cancer patients: User acceptance of a German internet portal offering information on the disease and treatment options, and a clinical trials matching service.

Markus Wallwiener1, Christian W Wallwiener, Sara Y Brucker, Andreas D Hartkopf, Tanja N Fehm, Julia K Kansy.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The internet portal http://www.brustkrebs-studien.de (BKS) was launched in 2000 by the German Society of Senology (DGS) and the Baden-Württemberg Institute for Women's Health (IFG) to provide expert-written information on breast cancer online and to encourage and facilitate the participation of breast cancer patients in clinical trials. We describe the development of BKS and its applications, and report on website statistics and user acceptance.
METHODS: Existing registries, including ClinicalTrials.gov, were analysed before we designed BKS, which combines a trial registry, a knowledge portal, and an online second opinion service. An advisory board guided the process. Log files and patient enquiries for trial participation and second opinions were analysed. A two-week user satisfaction survey was conducted online.
RESULTS: During 10/2005-06/2010, the portal attracted 702,655 visitors, generating 15,507,454 page views. By 06/2010, the website's active scientific community consisted of 189 investigators and physicians, and the registry covered 163 clinical trial protocols. In 2009, 143 patients requested trial enrolment and 119 sought second opinions or individual treatment advice from the expert panel. During the two-week survey in 2008, 5,702 BKS visitors submitted 507 evaluable questionnaires. Portal acceptance was high. Respondents trusted information correctness (80%), welcomed self-matching to clinical trials (79%) and planned to use the portal in the future (76%) and recommend it to others (81%).
CONCLUSIONS: BKS is an established and trusted breast cancer information platform offering up-to-date resources and protocols to the growing physician and patient community to encourage participation in clinical trials. Further studies are needed to assess potential increases in trial enrolment by eligibility matching services.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21126358      PMCID: PMC3016291          DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-10-663

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Cancer        ISSN: 1471-2407            Impact factor:   4.430


  34 in total

1.  Can improved communication increase patient participation in randomised clinical trials?

Authors:  C A Sawka; K I Pritchard
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 9.162

2.  E-mail minus 'e-mail'. California study shows that online communication can benefit patients, physicians and payers.

Authors:  Alden Solovy
Journal:  Hosp Health Netw       Date:  2002-11

3.  Computerized recruiting for clinical trials in real time.

Authors:  Debra L Weiner; Atul J Butte; Patricia L Hibberd; Gary R Fleisher
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 5.721

4.  Factors that predict the referral of breast cancer patients onto clinical trials by their surgeons and medical oncologists.

Authors:  L A Siminoff; A Zhang; N Colabianchi; C M Sturm; Q Shen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Decision support for clinical trial eligibility determination in breast cancer.

Authors:  L Ohno-Machado; S J Wang; P Mar; A A Boxwala
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  1999

6.  Clinical trial enrollment of rural patients with cancer.

Authors:  Electra D Paskett; M Robert Cooper; Nancy Stark; Thomas C Ricketts; Sara Tropman; Teresa Hatzell; Tim Aldrich; James Atkins
Journal:  Cancer Pract       Date:  2002 Jan-Feb

7.  Barriers and facilitators to enrollment in cancer clinical trials: qualitative study of the perspectives of clinical research associates.

Authors:  Eva Grunfeld; Louise Zitzelsberger; Marjorie Coristine; Faye Aspelund
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2002-10-01       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  eEurope 2002: Quality Criteria for Health Related Websites.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 9.  Review of internet health information quality initiatives.

Authors:  A Risk; J Dzenowagis
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2001 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  Benchmarking the quality of breast cancer care in a nationwide voluntary system: the first five-year results (2003-2007) from Germany as a proof of concept.

Authors:  Sara Y Brucker; Claudia Schumacher; Christoph Sohn; Mahdi Rezai; Michael Bamberg; Diethelm Wallwiener
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2008-12-02       Impact factor: 4.430

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Patient-Driven Second Opinions in Oncology: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Marij A Hillen; Niki M Medendorp; Joost G Daams; Ellen M A Smets
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2017-06-12

2.  Consumer input into research: the Australian Cancer Trials website.

Authors:  Rachel F Dear; Alexandra L Barratt; Sally Crossing; Phyllis N Butow; Susan Hanson; Martin Hn Tattersall
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2011-06-26

3.  Characteristics of clinical trial websites: information distribution between ClinicalTrials.gov and 13 primary registries in the WHO registry network.

Authors:  Daisuke Ogino; Kunihiko Takahashi; Hajime Sato
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2014-11-05       Impact factor: 2.279

4.  Acceptance of the German e-mental health portal www.psychenet.de: an online survey.

Authors:  Sarah Liebherz; Jörg Dirmaier; Lisa Tlach; Juliane Thiel; Martin Härter
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 2.984

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.